apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

37^ EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
thought and language is decisive against such treatment'. This epistle
probably belongs to the year 63 or 64.
In the Pastoral Epistles again we have another type of Judaeo-
Gnostic heresy, somewhat more advanced than the last. The false
teaching there is described as 'gnosis (or knowledge) falsely so called'
(i Tim. vi. 20). It is a 'logomachy,'
it is disputatious, it is empty
talking (i Tim. i. 6, vi. 4, 20, 2 Tim. ii. 14, 16, 23, Tit. i. 10). It deals
in myths and genealogies (i Tim. i. 4, Tit. i. 14, iii. 9). It inculcates
asceticism (i
Tim. iv. 3, 8, Tit. i.
15). Here is the Gnostic side. On
the other hand it is distinctly Judaic. Its champions profess to be
'teachers of the law' (i
Tim. i.
7, 8).
The disputes are described as
'battles over the law' (Tit.
iii.
9). Its myths are called 'Jewish'
(Tit. i. 14). Its adherents, at least a portion of them, are described
as 'they of the circumcision' (Tit.
i.
lo). Here again critics have
been found who would split up this heresy into two, thus separating
the two elements which the Apostle's language will not allow us to
separate.
Again, the same treatment is tried for a third time on the Ignatian
letters. The necessity of this violent operation, thrice repeated, tells
its own tale. In all three cases, if we interpret our texts naturally, we
are confronted with forms of Judaic Gnosticism or Gnostic Judaism.
Thus they all alike illustrate the truth, which is sufficiently confirmed
from other quarters, that the earliest forms of Christian
Gnosticism were
Judaic. I need not stop to investigate the reason of this fact, as the
subject has been fully discussed elsewhere".
But accepting the Judaic character of this heresy, as an indication
of an early date, we have yet to deal with its trenchant Docetism.
What are we to say to this startling phenomenon Is it at all inconsistent
with the Ignatian authorship
Impressed by the materialistic tendencies of our own time, we find
it difficult to realize the force and prevalence of the bias which in
the earliest ages of the Gospel
led to Docetism. Yet it is a historical
fact that for those first generations of Christians the true humanity of
Christ was a greater stumbling-block even than the true divinity. The
Oriental mind in its most serious moods was prone to regard matter as
the source of evil. Contact with matter therefore was a thing to be
shunned. The moral and spiritual supremacy of Jesus Christ was a
fact of history. This carried with it His claim to divinity in some
sense or other. But it was inconceivable that such a Divine being
^
See Colossians p. 73 sq, where the ^ See Colossians ^. 81 sq.
question is discussed.